Sunday, May 20, 2012

Constitutions and constituents

A festival of Latinate words.

A few weeks ago I offered some unexpected praise to Mohammedans and to White Nationalists. Not folks noted for their friendliness to men like me. It was in recognition of their bruthal but refreshing frankness about insiders and outsiders, us and them, and who's supposed to be top dog and have "privilege". While liberal democrats have the same hierarchical structures, they lie about them through their teeth all the time. As I noted, I dislike this kind of hypocrisy not because it is unethical but because it is insulting to my intelligence and a waste of energy and time. The Allah-worshippers and the leukophiles may not be charming, but they have the ring of truth about them when it comes to human tribalism.

I have particular opinions about Islam and Muslims because I have made it my business to inform myself about this religion, while most people prefer to avoid knowing and just rely on slogans. Religion of all kinds is a longstanding interest of mine. My first high school history essay was on the Five Pillars of Islam. I have read the Koran (decades ago, before it was in the news). And I have investigated Muhammad's career, Muslim history, and the welter of hadith which are part of what makes Sharia, Islam's encompassing code of holy law. I have read a primary source of this code, al-Misri's Reliance of the Traveller. I have read through some of the on-line Muslim sites where they go for fatwa for themselves, to see how all this plays out in the contemporary world. I am not an expert about this expansionist theocracy, of course, but I am not uninformed.

What can I tell you? I'm a pinhead, a pointy-headed intellectual.

Of late I have also started investigating the White Nationalists. This is a realm far more taboo than Islam. After all, as we know, White Racism is the most evil force in human history...along with Patriarchy (White Patriarchy especially!). Even reading a book against it, in the presence of a sensitive Personne de Couleur, can get you thrown out of the university library.*

It's a small world, this White one. Almost totally male. And unsurprisingly, quite sectarian. Voices range from enraged expletive sputtering to deeply intellectual exploration. One of the more interesting sectors is the NorthWest Republic, an idea about creating a separate national homeland for Whites in the American NorthWest. One Harold Covington is a major voice for this movement, having written several novels describing it, as well as --and here's the link to the posting title-- a constitution for this imagined country. Although frankly anti-POC, and deeply anti-Jewish,  it is not White "supremacist" but "separatist". It does not want to rule non-Whites, just get away from them. All non-Whites are invited to leave the new country on their own or be buried there. Unapologetic tribalism.

The American Constitution was written by the Founding Fathers, quite naturally, for men like themselves. They didn't write it for the French, and certainly not for women, Indians or Blacks. They assumed a particular constituency for their very particular constitution. Both Washington and Adams were clear on that. Ben Franklin even wondered if that particular constituency could pull off such a thing as a republic which would not --like every other republic before it--devolve into a mobocracy, oligarchy and/or tyranny.

Well, that seemingly homogeneous** constituency, even in its varied forms, is fading away. Barring some kind of apocalyptic transformation, it seems that the anti-Straight White Male Christian coalition composed of liberal Whites and feminists and gays and the Peoples of Color have demographics on their side. In the end, constituents determine the meaning of constitutions. No piece of paper can finally thwart determined majority desire. (Unless, like the now fading White majority, it loses all its nerve).

So I found the post- (and anti) American NorthWest Republic constitution very interesting. It makes no appeal to Enlightenment universalism. (Look how that turned out.) It is frank in its valorizing of White survival above all, the traditional roles of men and women in the family, and the dominance of a particular culture and demographic. It recognizes classes of citizenship, based on accomplishment rather than mere birthplace or age. It outlaws Jews, homosexuals and race-mixers. There are, therefore, no non-European-descended people in the NWR; its whole point is the demographic survival of the now-dying-off White race: less than 1 in 5 humans and birthrates dropping fast.

Lawyers are outlawed, too. Duelling is a regulated but regular form of settling disputes between men, since civil suits are largely forbidden. Although it is a democracy with frequent elections, it is a single-party state, there is only a unicameral legislature and an executive (who is limited to a single term)***. And the judiciary is not a third branch of government. Judges are restricted to fact-finding and are constitutionally forbidden from sitting on an elevation higher than the defendant.

One interesting alternative balance-of-power element in this one-party two-branch state is that the constitution guarantees the absolute right of all citizens and residents to unlimited, untaxed, unlicenced and unregistered ownership and carry of weaponry. We'd see how polite a society a thusly-armed society would be! The police, though, like the British bobbies, are unarmed.

It is not capitalist, but promotes a kind of Caucasian juche, national self-reliance. Interest on loans is forbidden. It is also not libertarian: national service is universal, and healthcare and education are provided by the government. Income and private property are never taxed, but corporate bodies and sales are. Religion is free, but clergy may not earn a living as clergy and religious bodies are taxed like corporations. Rights are listed, but so are responsibilities. And the constitution, once ratified as the primary law, may not be amended. No "living document" here!



A fascinating exercise in post-American imagination in which you can see the White Nationalist point of view trying to avoid any repeat of the multicultural situation which gave rise to this movement in the first place. An unusual mix of statism and unfettered private life.

The US Constitution assumed its constituency, which is now being consumed by another one. The NWR constitution, learning from that mistake, makes its constituency abundantly clear. The US document came from a very self-confident culture and was focussed on freedom from tyranny; the NWR's is from a threatened tribe focused just on survival.  And it does raise a question. If it has been perfectly natural for ethno-states to exist in history, for Japan to belong to the Japanese or France to the French --or Ireland to the Irish and not the British-- on what ground is a race-state ruled out of court? **** After all, a tribe is a tribe.

As with Sharialand, it's no place for a man like me, but it doesn't insult your intelligence by polite lying and time-wasting hypocrisy.

***

*I remember this incident but couldn't find the material. There's too many hits when you google library, offensive, racist. (Thanks to Anonymous for finding the link for me.)

**Although Black slavery was the fundamental background problem driving the War Between the States, --and was a central problem in the Constitution's creation--the war was fought between these "homogeneous" White English-speaking American Men of Christian heritage. Not unusual; indeed a distinguishing species pattern. As with families, neighboring tribes with only minor differences can become violent enemies: Serbs and Croats, Tutsi and Hutu, etc. Most American liberals hate American George Bush and Republicans more than they ever did Osama Bin Laden.

***Like the Dominican Order, whose 800 year old Constitutional governance structure remains substantially intact!

****Liberia, founded for and by ex-slaves from America, restricts citizenship to persons of Black African heritage. Clearly racist. Americo-Liberians, a mere 2.5%, dominated the native Blacks until 1980's coup. When was the last time you heard anybody calling for an anti-racist boycott against them? Enjoy the dancing in this article about the country.

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis: Student Employee Found Guilty of 'Racial Harassment' for Reading a Book.

You're welcome.

USMaleSF said...

Thanks!

Anonymous said...

A "White Nationalist Republic" is a total absurdity! The struggle of these nationalists (who wish to suppress clues to 'race' and accordingly prefer 'nationalism' to racism) insofar as it has any reality at all is a struggle against liberal whites. They don't wish a tiny homeland for whites as such but for whites who want tribalism and the constitution as outlined in this posting by Ex Cathedra.

There maybe was, I suppose, a white homeland in the European North West prior to the imposition of the Roman empire and Christianity. And what was this fine homeland? A turf for aggressions and counter-aggressions and retaliations and blood feuds. Reminds me of Robert Graves' regressive preference for olde Englande of the corn doll rite, the restoration of which requires the immolation of every contribution of English-speaking people to Christianity and world civilization. No Chaucer, no Shakespeare, no KJV, no BCP, no Hobbes, no Locke, no "Anglo-Saxon legal system" (an achievement far beyond every other political legal system), no American history.

From a preference for the hillbilly feuds of the Appalachians and Ozarks, these Anglo-Saxon whites pour contempt on the first global civilization in the name of "our" ancestors.

Perhaps indeed Anglo-Saxony went all wrong c. 1955 with the demand for desublimation, but such "white nationalism" is totally a symptom of desublimation and insistence on declinism. What?! from the excesses of affirmative action and feminism and critical theory we are to hope that perhaps we will be permitted our own "whites only" tribalist homeland in some small part of Idaho?!

Anonymous said...

If a "black culture" or an "African-American culture" were described in such terms as are outlined in the White Nationalist constitution, the description would be dismiss'd as abhorrently racist, for stereotyping the paltry capacities of blacks for civilization.

The most ordinary white liberals would point to the ruins of ancient Zimbabwe and the account of Cush or Ethiopia in Herodotus and the Bible as evidence that blacks are capable of much more than a culture of tribalist violence.

PNWReader said...

In re the IUPUI case, the affirmative action thought policewoman was celebrated for 27 years of "service" at her April 30,2008, retirement party. Clearly, the timing of her retirement was an unrelated coincidence.

USMaleSF said...

Re the long comment. I have only dipped into the novels online..and skipped ahead to see the outcome...but the society Covington writes about there celebrates pan-European high culture, from Homer to Shakespeare, etc. while still promoting the martial masculinity of arms and the honor code. Rather like 18th century American revolutionaries. But no lawyers :)

Anonymous said...

I suppose, though, that the Islam deal is necessary for the sake of Marx's campaign to de-shirk Christian and Jewish revelation from state personnel (On the Jewish Question).

Obviously Marx prefer'd atheistic dialectical materialism as a religion that prepares obedient will-to-power in state personnel, but Nietzsche released the question of the genealogy of the dialectical materialists, and thus the use of real dialectical materialism had to cease after WW1, as Sartre notes.

So Islam's provisional stand-off between "theistic satisfaction" and Jewish and Christian shirking seems to be just the ticket. Perhaps Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor, O.P., will prefer Islam for his project to bring lofty rebellious atheists to unreal presence at the Table for earthly bread.

And in any case, post-Western post-civilization must have some sort of okay contents. This is imply'd by the "inclusivism" in the prevailing agenda.

For if "our culture" were only a system of racist, sexist, homophobic privilege like the KKK, there wouldn't be a demand for inclusion. They would demand simple abolition, as for the KKK. They don't say there should be affirmative action for POCs to become grand dragons etc in the KKK.

Since the West is a system composed by racism, sexism and homophobia (sc the slave revolt in morals of others vs sameness in the status quo of higher man; class division creates same and other, thus permitting capitalist expropriation of surplus value in personnel units, not merely value-neutral or dead personnel units), if this system is dissolved by anti-racism, anti-sexism, and marriage equality, there'd be nothing left but formalist structures (bohu).

The calls to prayer toward Mecca five times per day, becoming knowledgeable in the Hadith, the incredibleness of going on a pilgrimage to Mecca (compared with the dull tedium of Chaucer's poetry during the pilgrimage to Canterbury), thus will islam provide filler for the post-post-Christian era.

As we throw Mozart (girl singers, haram themes, and string'd and brass instruments) in the garbage bin, we shouldn't be angry at Islam but feel grateful that Islam provides a rich replacement for the Western things we are discarding!

Anonymous said...

I guess also wood wind instruments are forbidden. ... But the White Nationalists shouldn't be participating in any Islamophobia! At least, I've heard that Islam "opposes racism" but culturally permits a preference for light colouring. White Pride should be sitting pretty in any Islamic culture.

Anonymous said...

I remember mildly admonishing certain conservative students who perhaps were apprehensive that immigration was changing the complexion of America. My argument was that America could be improved in a conservative direction by the immigration of POCs who wish to improve their situation in life etc.

I playfully added that the forced emigration of leftists who hate America would also be advantageous -- e.g. the Maryknoll nuns (I was among RCs).

Let leftwing white America-haters find a new home in the USSR (still a going concern then) or the Third World which was then our preceptor on politics and economics, and let America-lovers however dark skin'd arrive, and a serious conservative political party would be greatly strengthen'd.

The "complexion" of the American population would be darker, though undoubtedly lightness of colouring would remain a factor in estimation of beauty, as in Africa, Araby, China, Japan, Latin America, the Caribbean.

And agitprop against America would have no political traction. White Democrats could not persuade Jamaicans that 'inner city' black family dysfunction is caused by insufficient funding for Head Start etc. ... A 'darker' but more pro-American population might also help undo desublimation lifestyle among whites by decided reluctance to vote for social programmes that permit a free-fall in family dysfunction among us too.

The worst thing that Afrikaaners ever did to the black population of South Africa was do exclusion in a way that permitted the ANC to dissolve Christianity and morals as irrrelevant, and instill the belief that quasi-Communist political action will result in prosperity.

Anonymous said...

Nietzschean genealogist of North West Republic agitator: »White Girl Bleed a Lot.«

Anonymous said...

Also, White Nationalist agitation intensifies the birth dearth among whites. Rather than settling down and marrying and raising a family, one reads white nationalist blogging agitprop, and stock piles food and survivalist stuff in preparation for the coming race war, which in any even could only be between whites (white survivalists vs white regular army and white FBI, as at Waco and Ruby Ridge).

Anonymous said...

Patrick Buchanan writes, perhaps accurately, that demographically the Republican party is doom'd. But the Republican party is even more doom'd by the Republican party!

More or less fancifully, we must assume, Mr Buchanan proposes the Republican party as the party of fiscal responsibility and argues that this reputation or appearance makes the party unattractive to minorities soon to become the majority.

Yet in fact if the Republicans had been fiscally competent, for instance, not participating in and blowing the whistle against the build up of sovereign debt whose interest payments are now funding China's military expansion; and not participating in the sub-prime lending boondoggle, then the actually fiscally responsible Republicans would be supported even by undocumented Mexicans, who came to the USA illegally in order to participate in economic opportunity.

The president himself says that the best thing that can happen to poor whites and POCs is a prosperous economy (The Audacity of Hope, p. 291).

White people at the very pinnacle of affluence also totally go for government programme boondoggles, as any competent economist will tell you.

Mr Buchanan likes to go after the British and, as I recall, also FDR, and free trade as ruining America. No doubt these white people have been bad. But he is less forthright about the ruin that whites have done to "white American civilization" -- the mainline protestant top clergy and academics who ruin'd Christianity as an actual belief and moral system among white protestants; the social justice V2 discreditors of American Catholic Christianity (supported by the bishops, the heralds of truth, according to the Catechism) so that now it's a filigree of spirituality laid over social justice 'activism' (government programmes); the white university academics who intepreted America only as a system of race-gender-class oppression (whose power elites were educated by these same academics for generations!), and so on. Buchanan never mentions the worst of all -- the peevish refusers of Freud's reconciliation of civilization and Nietzsche; they refused also civilization and Nietzsche, and Christianity.

The white birth rate could be double or triple what it is an America would still be in free fall -- whites as porno addicts, marriage despisers, Darwinian-theorists who promote 'game' rather than morals and marriage. Desublimation will undo Montesquieu whereas the new Oliver Cromwell whom the founders fear'd so much never show'd

I suppose (white) youngsters who are concern'd end up injected with such declinism -- and either do full-time blogging about undocumented workers and how to save the Republican party (as if saving the Republicans would help withstand insistence upon desublimation at the highest or rather the deepest levels of America).

Did He smile, His work to see?
'Cause He who made Woodstock made today's D.C.

Anonymous said...

What if there was a whole new generation of whites à la WJC coming along? Would that birth replenishment save 'white civilization'?

Mr Buchanan might also think to examine who ruin'd white Europe. White Europeans. They rejected real Christianity as a doctrine and sacramental religion. They rejected the aftermath of Christianity (Revolution, Hegel, dialectical materialism, Nietzsche, Heidegger). What "culture" could they possibly have to 'save' from "third world" immigrants? et al?

Mark Steyn expects Western youth to man the ramparts against incoming waves of Islam for the sake of his enjoyment of show tunes and musicals.

Anonymous said...

I look'd into Tim Wise's blog the other day after a long absence. He really can put together a lot of apparently very accurate information on American blacks' negative privilege, as Weber would call it. He can also plausibly bring in the Dred Scott decision as expressing the real daily life of blacks in America today.

But his real target isn't violence and oppression but the white supremacy meaning system. In his view 'race' is used to give an account of oppression only in Euro-America (white privilege or white supremacy), Japan (vs the Koreans) and Israel (vs the Palestinians). But the objection is to the biblical Christian meaning system, which after the fall of Christendom in the French Revolution was replaced by the biblically connected doctrine of 'race' or root (fruit of good and evil interpretation as root of the tree of life):

»Although Hitler’s campaign of genocide against European Jewry was rooted in his beliefs about Jews being a biologically distinct and destructive force, would his efforts have been any less racist—and would we have failed to call him a racist—had he stuck with older, more traditional forms of anti-Jewish bigotry: such as beliefs that Jews are culturally clannish, greedy, or have religious beliefs that cause them to kill Christian children and use their blood for baking Matzo? Would the murder of millions of Jews, under these auspices deserve to escape the charge of racism, just because Jews were being inferiorized on the basis of cultural assumptions rather than biological ones? Surely not.«

»So too, when European settlers came to America and proceeded to slaughter the indigenous of the continent they didn’t deploy—at least at first—scientific arguments to justify the slaughter. Rather they appealed to notions of cultural deficiency, civilizational inferiority and spiritual depravity. But by treating Indian folks as an undifferentiated mass, “racialized” if not scientifically “racial,” it would seem like a torturing of the language to deny that these actions amounted to a form of racism, simply because they began before biologized concepts of race had been fully developed.«

Perhaps the killings and so forth would go on -- the 'writing' in 'geography' that the military-industrial or warrior-priestinterpreter complex (from Japan China India Persia Araby Europe and America, and form Africa up to Siberia) seems to require when allow'd to thrive underground and write up into the cave in benighted armies clashing on darkling plains etc -- but without 'race' and also without the Bible to enable us in the world cave system to have some understanding of.

In any case, Mr Wise never seems to me to have the proper Good Samaritan focus, namely on helping the persons the most disadvantaged in a situation. His comprehensible anger and excoriation are vs whites with their race prejudices etc both the mild liberal sort and the brutal low-class 'hater' sort.

But leaving the white male holding the bag of unwanted karma for the whole American system that has no given up all sublimation purposes and is thus only oppression for the sake of desublimation doesn't necessarily help blacks and other minorities.

My sense is that Thomas Sowell would urge blacks to leave whites to their moral obsessions and narcissisms (whether racist or anti-racist) and to focus on what they can do, turning to government and thus (for now) mostl whites only for specific problem solving. No doubt whites will never really understand what living with "black disprivilege" means. Mr Wise no doubt would insist that he too has no real notion of what such negative privilege means. Although sometimes he makes a mistake, as when insisting that Trayvon Martin isn't an inkblot for anyone to project their interpretations onto -- except for Mr Wise's own interpretations.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps again we see the urgent need for Islam. Mr Wise and other anti-racists have made it impossible for whites to feel they are 'generic' Americans (or Canadians etc, or Europeans). No doubt this makes sense, since right from the beginning in the New World obviously Europeans and their descendants were not the only inhabitants etc. Blacks and AmerInds and Chinese etc made contributions: "we" did not insist on a whites only system, even the most extreme oppression as in slavery is still an involvement, as Hegel would remind us.

(Not that slavery has befallen only blacks by white slavers, or that blacks have never enslaved whites. But anti-racists' objection is to the race meaning system.)

But now that 'race' has been used by anti-racists to deny a generic identity to America, whites have a race identity as Hitler could only have dreamt of. Hitler had to undermine Christianity (which alas had long allow'd 'race' to eclipse identity with a view to confession and sacrament: joining a race membership party and maintaining church membership should have been a blunt absurdity, just like accepting 'dialectical materialism' and maintaining church membership). But American Christian clerics have not composed an intense meaning of Christian that could compete with 'white' 'black' 'Hispanic' etc as meaningful identities.

No Augustine has appear'd who could compose a racially pluralistic Christianity that would enable black Christians and white Christians to worship strongly in the same institutions. Although I should say that having look'd at a list of Rev. Jeremiah Wright's most anti-American statements, I have heard and read equally strong condemnations of America, white Christianity etc from white clerics and academics.

Well, obviously anti-racists don't want to return to the Christian revelation which begat race doctrine from its guillotined corpse.

Anonymous said...

What then? The white left holding the bag of karmic responsibility for a system that is only oppression and violence etc and has no transcending purposes. Oppression for the sake of desublimational thrills sounds hardly a reward for bearing all that karma. (I don't think I'm exaggerating. Foreigners perhaps hate white American feminists -- but qua feminists, not qua American oppressors. The black congressional caucus doesn't bear guilt in the eyes of "the world community" fort the Iraq war or supporting Israel. The karma for the system is born by whites only, and really only white men. The good in the system is entirely resistance! to the system, protest, working for change etc, against the system. No doubt white higher-man preens eagerly as a supporter or even a leader of change -- in agôn vs racist lower man. But he isn't the white man as such, the white man as such in the anti-racism morality drama is the judges who condemn'd Dred Scott to return to slavery, the bombers of Hiroshima, the exterminators of the Indians, Apartheid architects, and so on.

Nevertheless it is dangerous to bring American whites so close to a hitlerian self-concept -- dangerous especially for whites! cf Hitler's love of sacrificing Aryan boys in Operation Barbarossa in order to gain negative Lebensraum as set forth in the last pages of Mein Kampf. What if we became simple Nazis, and declared that bearing all this negative karma for the negation system means we merited ruling as the proper race lords?! Sure, the point would be a sacrifical blood offering to Odin et al in a war between white regular army and white aryan survivalists. But there'd be a lot of "collateral damage" to women and POCs. And at the end of the war, the much reduced numbers of whites -- a small south african style minority rule over all POCs, and with a value system hardly affirming of women's feminist goals and so on. And the race meaning system would remain, with its ties to the family of Noah the Dionysian Melchizedek vine planter father!

So isn't Islam to be welcomed in preference to an ongoing race identity system? Dissolve 'race' in the oblivion of the 'inner path' that puts down only shariah in the outer path, and denies access to the O.T?.

Anonymous said...

I remember with some astonishment when Amanda Marcotte in her blog on pressing forward with the feminist agenda about exclusion of Muslims. She is an atheist and said that perhaps it's no big deal to exclude atheists . But there must not be any signage or semiotics indicating that Muslims are excluded from any particular meaning venues within the culture.

As for drone attacks, she was especially alarm'd that an imam's mosque might be hit -- not a women's collective or women's literacy training centre but an imam's mosque.

And I see that Tim Wise scoffs at all patriotic Christian objections to an "Ground Zero Mosque" on grounds that all American lands were conquer'd from Indians. I wonder if he means that if white Christians took land from pagan Indians, then race-doctrine-less Muslims have every right to conquer American land away from white Christians -- and Americans have no right to defend their conquests? (»Your House is on Ground Zero (and Quite Without Permission«).

Anonymous said...

The Great Society -- which promised to achieve equality in achievement results in knowledge work (so that there must be equal achievement results between blacks, Latinos and [gentile] whites -- depends upon the equalness of all 'races' (all persons socially constructed or designated as this or that 'race').

There must not be any serious inequality between blacks, Latinos and [gentile] whites (The Audacity of Hope, p. 295), or the Promise has been broken.

Tim Wise seems to hold this too »Race, Intelligence and the Limits of Science: Reflections on the Moral Absurdity of “Racial Realism”«.

Now perhaps all population groups are equal in ability for high prestige knowledge work -- conveniently more or less mismeasured as "IQ." Yet usually, as by the president in his book, exempt 'Asians' and Jews (also perhaps indigenous peoples) from the reckoning of equality in potential for prestigious knowledge work that Darwinian randomness must have achieved for the (gentile) 'white' 'black' and 'hispanic" population groups.

We do not expect that average whites would succeed as much as Jews, even if given "Jewish" mothering, and I suppose we accordingly don't expect that Latinos and blacks would be equal with Jews. But the Great Society pervasively insists that an implicit promise that blacks and mestizo Latinos are the equals in potential for knowledge work with ordinary whites. If not, we would have to wonder whether at least some of the inequality is not the fault of whites (whom the drama requires to bear all bad karma, which is to say all inequality in results).

The Great Society accepts that Darwnian randomness could have arrived at great inequality between Gentile and Jewish whites, but this could not have happen'd between blacks and Gentile whites.

... To judge by his autobiography, the president was raised by a tiger mother, as we might say today. He allows that he slack'd off in college before transferring to Columbia, but his foundation for educational success was laid by the intense involvement of his mother. It is sad to me that perhaps the president doesn't understand this completely, and accordingly doesn't state that at the very least different cultures' parenting styles will ahve important results.

But with conservative journalists and academics he seems to feel that parenting today in Large sections of the black population is not as competently and dedicatedly given as formerly (p. 287; 303, 305) -- prior to the Great Society promises (286f).

Seems to me one bad thing that anti-racists do is to insist on one pattern for population groups self-esteem, namely proportion of members high achievers in knowledge work. Nietzsche doesn't even mention anything like IQ and knowledge work hypertrophy as a measure of the value of a people (Zarathustra 1001 goals).

Anonymous said...

Yet if the Great Society isn't working out as an equalizer of population groups, even though smart whites aren't having any children as Pat Buchanan et al complain, it is nevertheless a great geographical writing system of the meaning of race plus a little bit of 'gender' and something on homophobia or the slave revolt in morals. ...

Tim Wise proposes that a reparations system for all blacks in America for the karmic legacy of slavery and negative privilege and ongoing white privilege should be built more or less as America paid for the rebuilding of Western Europe with the Marshall Plan, and also the rebulding of Japan. He mentions also the Homesteading act that benefited whites with free land. But these things were civilization building projects, including those in competition with Communism (whose rejection, incidentally, Tim Wise blames on white racism vs Asians, incidentally »Paleness as Pathology: The Future of Racism and Anti-Racism in America« May 2006). The Marshall Plan and Homesteading Act weren't mere giveaways -- although various whites have received tons of governmental giveaways.

Yet perhaps the money spent on the Great Society is also a civilization builder -- a geographic or geopoliticial writing from below in the underground upon us in the world cave; an information system as the meaning of America's global empire. A plea for rescue from Biblical and from Bible-derivative racial meaning systems? ...

Anonymous said...

AG Eric Holder perhaps understands the building of the Great Society system this way, an information system that reveals the role of POCs to whites as a way of reparations for their negatively privileged status:

The reparations: »“Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices,” Holder said. “The question is not when does it end, but when does it begin ... When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are entitled?”«

The information:
»Holder expressed support for affirmative action, saying that he “can’t actually imagine a time in which the need for more diversity would ever cease.”«
»He added that as a Columbia student, he “saw diversity and interacted with people who had different views.”
»“People come from so many different backgrounds and bring so many different perspectives that the study of contemporary civilization is enriched by those people,” he said.«
(quoted in Columbia University "Spectator" 24 Feb 2012)

That the ego can't "imagine" a time when the Great Society race knowledge system doesn't mean that such an aiôn can't arrive, as with a Caliphate. ... I guess I saw a semiotic reference to the Caliph as "the emperor" as hemperor (hemp, spliff). ... Not to mention the dualisticallly half true presentations by semiot semi-ought ohm(resistance measurement) matic (teaching) firearm. etc

Anonymous said...

On the other hand, conservatives can't deny that Michelle Obama confirms traditional gender role expectations -- not having the real career in the marriage, primary focus on the children (she doesn't indicate that she feels this is 'staying home and baking coolies' in a betrayal of her 'profession') and helping her husband (she took his last name upon marriage and didn't vacillate on this). Her theme for the First Ladyship is proper childhood nutrition.

Admittedly HRC was only sort-of independent, and is heavily involved in ponderous traditionalism:

»Triggered in part by the death of her father in April 1993, she publicly sought to find a synthesis of Methodist teachings, liberal religious political philosophy, and Tikkun editor Michael Lerner's "politics of meaning" to overcome what she saw as America's "sleeping sickness of the soul" and that would lead to a willingness "to remold society by redefining what it means to be a human being in the twentieth century, moving into a new millennium."« (wikipedia)

P.S. Taoist Christians: »In the day-to-day [no night vision] work of the men and women I met in church each day, in their ability to "make a wei out of wu-wei" and maintain hope and dignity[= faith and agape?] in the dual rest of circumstances, I could see the Word manifest [Mani faustus for the non-ego helmsman].« (Audacity p. 245)

in other words, you can transfer from Occidental* to Columbia** any time you like, but you can never leave.
*west
**(northwards marching)column bey?

Anonymous said...

The "politics of meaning" sc probably manna (names and explanations etc, thus 'meanings') for stuff given out in value-neutral dispensation. Reminds of Weber on law: one way or another, all law is formalistic (somehow value-neutrally requires compliance -- whether 'sacred' law, 'rational-legal' law, even contract law [a deal is struck from calculation of interests, but qua law it is to be formalistically enforced]). The "homo politicus" (sc political sameness) "performs his duty best when he acts without regard to the person in question, sine ira et studio, without hate and without love, without personal predilection and therefore without grace [no dominion founded in grace, dammit!], but sheerly in accordance with the impersonal duty imposed by his calling, and not as a result of any concrete personal relationship." Thus is 'masterless slavery' attain'd -- formal freedom in interpretation while claiming compulsion in matter taken from Nature (Economy and Society p. 600).

Buddhist political man or non-ego may seem an exception, but the duty to do compassion for all living items is formalistic, impersonal -- supposedly valuationally obligatory but not evaluative e.g. in shame or contempt. ... Weber interprets 'natural law' as the application of a cross-section averageness.

The (shoreline) watch takes a licking (liking, imitation; not ratio), but keeps on tikkun. ... Yet the payment to the political will-to-power elite for providing free earthly bread is in explanations, manna (as recommended by JN Matthew 4:4).

But the Beatitudes, Lao-Tsu and Sankyam are for exhausted men (Nietzsche, AntiChrist ¶32); so also the nihilism of the "Last man" of Western Europe. Such men easily overcome any temptation to do "competitive mimesis" or compete in imitation of Nature. The 'strong but ill-constituted' barbarians of Western Europe could not go directly to the Beatitudes or to Buddhism (the Sankkyam) and Lao-Tsu were these even available, but had to do a long course of attentuation or taming ("Kultur" is taming) (ibid ¶19) before they would give only silent images (coins) sc mimesis to Caesar, even of the modern technological version of the military-industrial complex. Then they could do the beatitudes buddhism taoism maybe as 'protest' and 'resistance' and Gelassenheit. But they would not have us return to them Gelassenheit rather than eager compassion that contains their wastelands via the sacrament.

Anonymous said...

Islam can serve Selfs by a narrowing that liberates the world from Hobbesian distrust (sc "the police of suspicion" Gay Science ¶344) by giving institutions into the world ['the outer path' of Shariah] that impose an ethic of institutional loyalty. Cf Dreams p. 197.

Read my "American Religion from the Half-Way Covenant to Wu Wei Neighbourhood Organizing."

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...